...is give war a chance...
Argentina probably benefited from defeat even more than Britain did from victory. The war was initiated by the repressive Argentine military dictatorship in part to shore up flagging popular support for the military junta. In the short run, the gambit worked. Even most left-wing Argentines cheered when the junta's forces captured the islands on April 2, 1982. But, contrary to Argentine expectations, the British did not take the invasion lying down, but instead sent a task force that eventually recaptured the Islands. The defeat discredited the military government even among its supporters, and led to its collapse a year later. The restoration of civilian rule in 1983 ended one of the most repressive periods in Argentine history, and led to the trial and conviction of several of the junta's members for human rights violations... [bold added]
Of course, the left was aghast, including one of my favourite (spelling intentional) bands, The Fixx, who musically derided Britian's efforts to re-outfit a cruise ship for the Falklands war...
Liner, it was a fantasy sea cruise
It was a bet destined to lose
Across the waves, what was he thinking? ....
Island in a forgotten latitude
And with colonial attitude
They took the chance for repossession
Grey skies there were no palm trees in the wind
And when a saint starts hiding sins
It's all aboard whilst peace is sinking
All aboard before the storm
Crossing swords before the dawn
Seen before, back in an infant's dream
Like a rubber duck, floating in the bath ....
Cause, you know, we're always wrong, and have bad motives, and they're always right, and have justified grievances. That's all you need to know, really, to evince a "moral" posture.
You know what "peace" is? Peace is when we, the 'civilized' nations, aren't involved, or don't fight back. Hitler annexes Czechoslovakia? Chamberlain calls the situation "peace", as in "peace in our time." We didn't have "war" when Saddam took Kuwait -- only when we responded. Same with Vietnam and Korea. And Argentina, ruled by a military dictatorship who subjected the population to torture, was thus "at peace" until Britian got involved. See? "Peace is sinking." Good riddance, apparently.
So why this reflexive stance -- us bad, them good?
Because the "us" who is bad is never the same "us" who's making that statement. It isn't really that the left thinks "we", the US or Britian, are bad. Just that other people in their society (not they!) are bad. They are locked in a struggle against their countrymen, and these "Others" -- these outsiders -- are mere propaganda props in that battle. Hence the utter disinterest.
So the military junta ruling Argentina, who took control of the Falklands were, to the Fixx, merely a "colony" in a "forgotten latitude." Otherwise, they occupy no space, lyrically or mentally.
Drawing upon another pop-culture reference, here's a pertinent movie review (italics mine):
"The Constant Gardener" ... exemplifies how cinematic political correctness, the fear of showing human differences, strips Africans of their distinctiveness, rendering them ciphers who merely suffer nobly at the hands of fascinating white villains....
Don't assume... that Le Carré and the American critics who revere him are consumed by White Guilt. They're not blaming themselves, just white people they already hated. White culturati use black [or Other] victims as props in their endless competition to win superior moral status over other whites....
Taking a queue from Jesus, the left often demands we love our enemies. But it is not their enemy they wish for us to love and forgive. Their enemies are George Bush, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, etc. They have no love for these individuals, and no forgiveness for them. Instead, they make a show of loving the enemies of our nation or our culture -- Al Qaeda, OBL, Saddam, Hamas, Iran, etc. -- anyone who actually appears to wish us harm, but towards whom they bear little, if any, visible ill will.