With his imperialistic seizure of the islands, Onslow began a sequence of events that would end nearly 150 years later in war. Shortly after the invasion, the Argentine government set out four arguments in favour of their ownership of the Falklands:

1. Argentina ruled all land in the region formerly held by Spain.

2. Spain had purchased the islands from France.

3. Britain had abandoned its claim to the Falklands in a "secret" 1771 agreement.

4. Britain had abandoned its settlement in West Falkland in 1774.(4)

No matter how well formed these arguments may have been, they fell on deaf ears in Britain.

The Falkland Islands lie 8,000 miles Southwest of Britain, a distance that takes at least 21 days to traverse by ship. During the negotiations Britain, for the most part, had not taken any overt military action to fortify the islands. (11) Therefore, there was only a small garrison of troops in the Falklands on April 2, 1982. At 4:30 am 150 Argentine marine commandos landed at Mullett Creek, three miles south of Stanley, the island's capital.(12) While a fierce guerrilla battle broke out between the Argentines and the British Marines at the Government House, the British soldiers never really had a sporting chance. At 6:00 that evening, Governor Rex Hunt, having surrendered to Argentine General Manuel Osvaldo Jorge Garcia, left the Falklands. (13) With the governor's departure, the Falkland Islands fell into Argentine hands. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher ensured that the English response to the invasion was swift and decisive. The House of Commons met in emergency session on April 3 and was told that a task force had already been dispatched to the South Atlantic. (14) The diplomatic response was equally swift. United Nations Security Council Resolution 502 was introduced on the very day of the invasion. Resolution 502 called for the immediate cessation of hostilities and the withdrawal of all Argentine forces from the islands. The resolution passed by one vote and became, according to one source, "a formidable part of her [Britain's] diplomatic armoury."(15)

However, since it was previously proven that the theory of frustration and aggression doesn't completely apply to the Falklands situation, it is only reasonable to believe that the war might have been averted. Presuming that the British would have fought for the islands under any circumstance, avoiding armed conflict would have meant clearing up the misconceptions held by the junta. While she certainly did not cause the war, Britain must shoulder some of the blame for Argentina's gross misreading of the Falklands situation. During the seventeen years between 1965 and 1982, Britain's actions quite often contradicted her words. A good example of this behaviour lies in the proposed decommissioning of the HMS Endurance. The Endurance was the Royal Navy's only permanent presence within the South Atlantic. In 1981, Prime Minister Thatcher made the decision that the Endurance would be scrapped. The Argentineans thought that this massive reduction in South Atlantic naval strength meant that Britain was losing interest in the region.(38) Countless actions such as these cost the British a great deal of credibility at the negotiating

Some common words found in the essay are:
Falkland Islands, Linklater Gillman, Union Jack, Conflict Prevented, HMS Clio, Leopoldo Galtieri, William Ury, Falklands Islands, Presuming British, United According, linklater gillman, eddy linklater gillman, eddy linklater, falkland islands, falklands war, frustration aggression, hastings jenkins, margaret thatcher, war london, frustration aggression model, prime minister, leopoldo galtieri, falklands war london, human rights violations, margaret thatcher ensured,
Approximate Word count = 3750
Approximate Pages = 15 (250 words per page double spaced)