Spain- Cont from Irish Times Thread

Sand

This Thread is an offshoot of the disagreement me and Tools had in the "Interesting Article in the Irish times today" over appeasement which then grew into Spain as an example raised by Tools, which then became just about Spain. The post to which im replying to was Tools last in the Irish Times thread- I just posted it here because it was going so far off topic


Tools:
Hitler not impressed by defence of Poland.

You overestimate the importance of Spain.

BTW I read that link- Interesting point in it.

There is an unfortunate passage in the beginning of the book that attempts to describe what the world would have been like had Hitler actually succeeded in taking Gibraltar. Such suppositions, though they attempt to underline the importance of events of this period, go perhaps too far. By depicting events that did not happen, it takes away from described events that actually did occur.

Best way to stop illegal trading (amazingly unpatriotic given the patriotism a war can fire up- Right up from the sailors who brought the cargo to spain and then onwards, right up to the bussinessman in charge) would have been for US intelligence to detect it and stop it. If they didnt use Spain then they wouldve used another neutral country- Like Sweden.

BTW can you post a link to that excerpt- sounds fascinating.

And it was a one sided propaganda piece- the franco link you provide calls franco moderate and just, is it true just because you read it?

EDIT
Actually I may have read you wrong- I assumed you were calling for intervention against Franco and his Fascist forces. However you have cited articles where Franco prevented Hitler from taking Gibraltar and which describe Franco as fair and just- Were you actually calling for intervention in favour of Franco?

tools

Originally posted by Sand
Tools:
Hitler not impressed by defence of Poland.

What?

You overestimate the importance of Spain.

I'd concur with Hitler and say that Spain was crucial to the control of north africa and the meditteranean. Without gibraltar in allied hands, there was no way operation torch could have taken place, then there was no way the invasion of italy could have taken place either.

Best way to stop illegal trading (amazingly unpatriotic given the patriotism a war can fire up- Right up from the sailors who brought the cargo to spain and then onwards, right up to the bussinessman in charge) would have been for US intelligence to detect it and stop it. If they didnt use Spain then they wouldve used another neutral country- Like Sweden.

Notions like patriotism or morality doesn't really come into big business unless there's some profit to be made. Sweden did trade with the nazis during the war.

BTW can you post a link to that excerpt- sounds fascinating.

Yup.

And it was a one sided propaganda piece- the franco link you provide calls franco moderate and just, is it true just because you read it?

The Franco link I took from a conservative website cos I'm bored with you saying everything is "propaganda". I haven't read the book but the review seems fair. Franco was "moderate" in so far as fascists can be called such. Even Mussolini was "moderate" compared to Hitler. He didn't really buy into the whole thing. In fact, unlike many other countries in WW2, Italian troops and people frustrated nazi efforts to round up jews as much they could.

You can choose to take Orwell's first hand account of the spanish civil war seriously or you can dismiss it as lies and propaganda. I don't care.

Actually I may have read you wrong- I assumed you were calling for intervention against Franco and his Fascist forces. However you have cited articles where Franco prevented Hitler from taking Gibraltar and which describe Franco as fair and just- Were you actually calling for intervention in favour of Franco? [/B]

Franco needed the trade with the allied forces, that's why he prevented hitler from taking gibraltar, but spain's neutrality was the next best thing to being openly on the side of the nazis. Intervention or at least some sales of weapons to republican forces in the spanish civil war could have showed hitler that the democracies actually had some balls. If franco had been defeated, and if hitler still invaded europe, an anti-fascist spain would have been of huge assistance to the allies. Spain did provide a division of volunteers to fight in Russia.

By the standards of conservative people, Franco was a fair and just dictator. I, however, disagree with that and don't think there can be any such thing as a fair and just dictator.

Sand

What?

You fail to recognise the fact that Hitler was unimpressed by Britain and France intervening to prevent his invasion of Poland. He was so unimpressed by Britain that he considered it feasible to fight a two front war. You havent given any good reason why he would suddenly be impressed the Britain and France getting involved in the Spanish civil war- the intervention into which would most likely have only brought the Second World war slightly ahead of schedule. When the Allies were even less prepared for the war.

We pretty much agree on the importance of Spain, though we seem to misunderstand each other- I see no strategic interest in Spain that could be satisfied by intervention. The communists were unlikely to co-operate with Hitler, and neither did Franco, according to the link you provided. Franco may have allowed it to be used as a "stepping stone" to supply the Axis forces, where the communists may not have but you admit yourself that Sweden could have equally been used.

I do find it fascinating that absolutely everybody involved in the entire process of physically transporting the goods from the US to the Third Reich during war time, not even *one* of them had even an ounce of patriotism in what are patriotic times. Whatever about the bussiness men behind the deal, nobody actually involved in the process bothered to inform the US intelligence services? I, much like you Im sure, am pretty puzzled by that.