03 Jun 11
Originally posted by KunsooThe invisible Abraham Lincoln was in the Spanish Civil War. He had a brigade named after him.
Communists were just a part of the Republican coalition. Basically, it probably would have remained a parliamentary democracy.
The biggest impact however, might have been outside Spain. Maybe Hitler would have been less emboldened had the other democracies not been so apathetic towards what was essentially a prolonged military coup. If they had matched ...[text shortened]... e altered history had Abraham Lincoln been able to turn invisible and had an alien robot friend.
03 Jun 11
1 edit
Originally posted by Kunsoo
Communists were just a part of the Republican coalition. Basically, it probably would have remained a parliamentary democracy.
The biggest impact however, might have been outside Spain. Maybe Hitler would have been less emboldened had the other democracies not been so apathetic towards what was essentially a prolonged military coup. If they had matched ...[text shortened]... e altered history had Abraham Lincoln been able to turn invisible and had an alien robot friend.
03 Jun 11
Originally posted by no1marauderIn 1940, Communist Spain would not have been very hostile towards Germany. At the time, Germany and the USSR were allies (or at least friendly neutrals). There would have been no reason to attack Spain unless it was actively helping the Allies. Yugoslavia was only invaded after the Simovic cabal took power as an openly pro-Allied government with borders as little as 150 miles from Ploesti.
Hitler regarded Spain as important enough to deploy a panzer brigade and enough combat air to tip the balance in Franco's favor. I think the chances of him leaving a hostile state unoccupied in Europe was remote.
- Joined
- 03 Feb 07
- Moves
- 201755
03 Jun 11
Originally posted by sh76This was actually a sore point among communists, particularly those who had fought in the Spanish Civil war and felt betrayed by the pact. But I remember my communist grandfather justifying it by saying, "after the allies caved at Prague it became obvious that the western powers wanted a confrontation between communism and fascism so they could swoop in and defeat the weakened winner." He was convinced that this was Neville Chamberlain's motivation.
In 1940, Communist Spain would not have been very hostile towards Germany. At the time, Germany and the USSR were allies (or at least friendly neutrals). There would have been no reason to attack Spain unless it was actively helping the Allies. Yugoslavia was only invaded after the Simovic cabal took power as an openly pro-Allied government with borders as little as 150 miles from Ploesti.
03 Jun 11
Originally posted by KunsooIt's hard to imagine Neville Chamberlain swooping in to defeat anyone.
This was actually a sore point among communists, particularly those who had fought in the Spanish Civil war and felt betrayed by the pact. But I remember my communist grandfather justifying it by saying, "after the allies caved at Prague it became obvious that the western powers wanted a confrontation between communism and fascism so they could swoop in and ...[text shortened]... efeat the weakened winner." He was convinced that this was Neville Chamberlain's motivation.
03 Jun 11
Originally posted by KunsooSomething similar to what happened in the episode of South Park about the Super Best Friends? Maybe John Wilkes Booth (or "FMF", as we've come to know him on this site) would have put on his super X-ray vision glasses, detected the invisible Abraham Lincoln, immobilised his alien robot friend with hypermagnetic beam emitters, and gunned down the President with his ultra-laser cannon!
Now, maybe we should speculate on what might have altered history had Abraham Lincoln been able to turn invisible and had an alien robot friend.
03 Jun 11
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76Maybe the question then is what would have happened in 1941? During the period of the Nazi-Soviet pact, Hitler might have respected Spanish neutrality (indeed, he would have had to, as this presumably would have been a condition of the Nazi-Soviet pact!). But presumably if Spain had been Communist it would have followed the Soviet Union straight into the war, opening up a new front against Hitler. The Germans might well have sought to conquer Spain quickly because of the strategic importance of the Western Mediterranean; but this of course would have meant diverting troops from elsewhere. What battles elsewhere would Hitler have had to forfeit, in order to conquer Spain? Surely the diversion of weapons and manpower away from the war's other fronts would have given the Allies a decisive advantage.
In 1940, Communist Spain would not have been very hostile towards Germany. At the time, Germany and the USSR were allies (or at least friendly neutrals). There would have been no reason to attack Spain unless it was actively helping the Allies. Yugoslavia was only invaded after the Simovic cabal took power as an openly pro-Allied government with borders as little as 150 miles from Ploesti.
One alternative possibility suggests itself, though: would the presence of a Communist Spain have made it impractical for the Germans to attempt an invasion of the Soviet Union at all? If so, the Nazi-Soviet pact might have lasted longer, with dire consequences for the Allies.
03 Jun 11
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76I think you're right that this is the biggest "if": not only the assumption that a Republican Spain would inevitably have gone Communist, but that this would have had a decisive knock-on effect on France. I think that's arguably the hypothesis that most obviously betrays John Reilly's Catholic conservative outlook; a lot of writers on the (not quite far) right want to assume that the consequences of a Republican victory would have been worse than those of Franco's victory.
Well, for starters, his thing about Spain being a Soviet colony is far fetched. The biggest indictment is the one he brings up himself. Spain is too far away and not connected to any Soviet territory. The USSR would have no way to control Spain. They controlled Czechoslovakia by rolling tanks into Prague. How, exactly, would they have rolled tanks into Madrid. WWII and I don't see why that would have been different if they were ruled by Communists.
British Conservative writer A.N. Wilson, in After the Victorians, makes a similar comment (I'm quoting from memory as I've no idea where my copy is): "If Spain had gone Communist then Blum, the socialist Prime Minister of France, would have allowed France to go Communist, and eventually the sinister hand of Stalin would have held sway from Moscow to Dieppe."
Wilson wants to believe this so much that he doesn't even let the awkward chronology deter him!
03 Jun 11
2 edits
Originally posted by TeinosukeHitler would not have invaded Spain after Barbarossa. He was too busy dealing with the Russians.
Maybe the question then is what would have happened in 1941? During the period of the Nazi-Soviet pact, Hitler might have respected Spanish neutrality (indeed, he would have had to, as this presumably would have been a condition of the Nazi-Soviet pact!). But presumably if Spain had been Communist it would have followed the Soviet Union straight into the w l? If so, the Nazi-Soviet pact might have lasted longer, with dire consequences for the Allies.
It's doubtful Spain would have joined the war merely because Hitler invaded the USSR. The Spanish would have no doubt been too scared of the Germans to join the war while the Germans were still powerful, especially after their experience in the Spanish civil war.
Perhaps, though, they would have joined in 1943 or 1944 to help a little in the mop up.
As for a Communist Spain deterring Barbarossa, unlikely. The war on the USSR was Hitler's one overarching military aim. Mein Kampf, apart from being about Jews, is all about tearing off the southern part of the USSR to turn it into a German breadbasket. If war with the UK and an escalating undeclared struggle with the United States couldn't deter Barbarossa, a Spain with a military crippled by civil war would hardly do the same. Spain would have made a tough invasion target because of its terrain, but would not have made a big time offensive threat. The Pyrenees face invaders from Spain as well. There's no way the Spanish march into France to take on the Wehrmacht.
03 Jun 11
Originally posted by KunsooYeah, that's the old Soviet line.
This was actually a sore point among communists, particularly those who had fought in the Spanish Civil war and felt betrayed by the pact. But I remember my communist grandfather justifying it by saying, "after the allies caved at Prague it became obvious that the western powers wanted a confrontation between communism and fascism so they could swoop in and ...[text shortened]... efeat the weakened winner." He was convinced that this was Neville Chamberlain's motivation.
It's complete BS, of course. Chamberlain and Dadlier caved at Munich because they had no stomach for another war and were either blind to the Hitler threat or chose to ignore it. Obviously, the theory that the British and French wanted Hitler to turn east is belied by the fact that they did end up going to war over Poland months later.
03 Jun 11
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungYou're comparing the Maginot line, which was a series of fortifications that - oops! - didn't cover the area that happened to be the flattest road to Paris (and the one that the Germans chose in 1914 even without a Maginot line), to the fierce obstacles of mountainous southern Europe? Come on.
I am quite aware of the Pyranees. Spain is still a good base of operations.
You sound like the French talking about the Maginot line 😛
If you look at all of WWII history, a common thread is that invading armies did terribly in mountainous terrain. This was true of the Germans in the Caucuses as it was of the Americans in Italy. The one exception was the German blitz of Yugoslavia, though that was accomplished mainly by leveling Belgrade in any case.
There's a reason the Allies landed in northern Europe in 1944 against fierce resistance rather than in southern Europe where the beaches were almost undefended.