If the Spanish Civil War had gone the other way...

Originally posted by sh76
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.

Spain wouldn't have been "Communist"; you're making the same error Reilly did (after ridiculing his committing it).

If you don't think the Spanish government of 1936 wasn't extremely hostile to Nazism, your history needs bulking up.

Could you please name me a country in Europe that had a leftist government that wasn't attacked by the Nazis in WWII?

Originally posted by sh76
You'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.

If you look at all of WWII history, a common thread is that invad ...[text shortened]... st fierce resistance rather than in southern Europe where the beaches were almost undefended.

A few nitpicks if I may. The Germans did not break through in a flat area of the front. Their breakthrough was in the Ardennes forests of Battle of the Bulge fame. In fact, 2 strong French armies were quickly deployed to defend the flat areas of Belgium where the Germans had attacked in WW I.

The choice for Normandy had little to do with geography but more a trade-off of defences versus proximity to England. In fact the bocage made Normandy a bad place to be on the offensive (though this was not completely recognized before the invasion). The areas around Bordeaux would have given a smaller advantage to any defenders.

I do wholeheartedly agree that an offensive through the Pyrenees would be nearly impossible. Google Earth gives an interesting 3D map if you change the viewing angle, check out the French-Spanish border that way and you'll see the difficulties any invader would have over there.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Spain wouldn't have been "Communist"; you're making the same error Reilly did (after ridiculing his committing it).

If you don't think the Spanish government of 1936 wasn't extremely hostile to Nazism, your history needs bulking up.

Could you please name me a country in Europe that had a leftist government that wasn't attacked by the Nazis in WWII?

It's hard to tell what Germany would have done with a leftist Spain, but I'm not sure they'd invade. Unlike France, Spain was in no position to threaten Germany so there was no real military use/need to attack it. Spain itself probably wouldn't have entered the war anytime soon, they needed to rebuild after their civil war, whatever the outcome.

Originally posted by sh76
Yeah, that's the old Soviet line.

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.

The old Soviet line is the truth, though.

"If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible." Harry Truman in his 1941 speech. This was the prevalent mood among Western politicians at the time.

Further example of this was the British-French-Soviet talks of 1939, where Britain and France sent a low-level delegation by the slowest route possible and then used the stalling and delaying tactics to ensure the failure of the negotiations.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Could you please name me a country in Europe that had a leftist government that wasn't attacked by the Nazis in WWII?

The Social Democrats were in charge of Sweden throughout the war... leading an all-party coalition, granted... and selling iron ore to the Germans, to be sure... hmmm... maybe they don't count after all...

Originally posted by Barts
It's hard to tell what Germany would have done with a leftist Spain, but I'm not sure they'd invade. Unlike France, Spain was in no position to threaten Germany so there was no real military use/need to attack it. Spain itself probably wouldn't have entered the war anytime soon, they needed to rebuild after their civil war, whatever the outcome.

Norway was in no position to threaten Germany either, but that didn't stop the Germans from grabbing it for similar strategic reasons.

Originally posted by Barts
A few nitpicks if I may. The Germans did not break through in a flat area of the front. Their breakthrough was in the Ardennes forests of Battle of the Bulge fame. In fact, 2 strong French armies were quickly deployed to defend the flat areas of Belgium where the Germans had attacked in WW I.

The choice for Normandy had little to do with geography but more ...[text shortened]... ench-Spanish border that way and you'll see the difficulties any invader would have over there.

Regarding the first statement: Yes, but the breakthrough in the Ardennes was made possible because the French were counting on defending against a German attack north of the Ardennes on the flat road to Paris that was chosen in 1914. Either way, the Maginot line was, in the immortal words of Herman Wouk "An enormous, tragic joke: half a wall."

Originally posted by no1marauder
Spain wouldn't have been "Communist"; you're making the same error Reilly did (after ridiculing his committing it).

If you don't think the Spanish government of 1936 wasn't extremely hostile to Nazism, your history needs bulking up.

Could you please name me a country in Europe that had a leftist government that wasn't attacked by the Nazis in WWII?

Spain wouldn't have been "Communist"; you're making the same error Reilly did (after ridiculing his committing it).

No, I'm saying "even if..." I made no judgment as to whether Spain would actually have been Communist. I'm saying that even if they were, it wouldn't have made as much of a difference to the war as that author surmises.

Could you please name me a country in Europe that had a leftist government that wasn't attacked by the Nazis in WWII?

Other than the USSR, what countries did have leftist governments at all? France? France declared war on Germany and, in any case, was obviously a major threat.

Originally posted by Barts
The choice for Normandy had little to do with geography but more a trade-off of defences versus proximity to England. In fact the bocage made Normandy a bad place to be on the offensive (though this was not completely recognized before the invasion). The areas around Bordeaux would have given a smaller advantage to any defenders.

The choice for Normandy had little to do with geography but more a trade-off of defences versus proximity to England.

That's part of "geography" in the sense that I was using it. In any case, the marshlands around Normandy are a minor obstacle compared to a major mountain chain.

Originally posted by infomast
The old Soviet line is the truth, though.

"If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible." Harry Truman in his 1941 speech. This was the prevalent mood among Western politicians at the time.

Further example of this was the British-French-Sovi ...[text shortened]... ble and then used the stalling and delaying tactics to ensure the failure of the negotiations.

If the west was so intent on seeing a German-Soviet war in 1939, why did they declare war over the invasion of Poland?

Originally posted by sh76
If the west was so intent on seeing a German-Soviet war in 1939, why did they declare war over the invasion of Poland?

That option was no longer available was it?

They did send a military mission to Moscow trying to persuade the Soviets to enter the war if Poland was attacked (even though Poland flat out refused to even consider allowing Soviet forces transit EVEN IF Poland was invaded!). The Soviets asked pointed questions about what military measures the West were willing to take in case of war and was told the British could deploy a division or two and France might consider an offensive against the Germans! This was while the USSR had promised to deploy 200 divisions in the first week!

It is no wonder why Stalin did not take them seriously. If the Soviets had entered the war, they would have found themselves fighting alone (as the Poles did).

Look everyone knows why the UK and France declared war; after the aftermath of Munich the population in those countries were unwilling to allow further Nazi expansion. But that does not mean their leaders didn't do everything they could to provoke a German-Soviet war.

Originally posted by sh76

The choice for Normandy had little to do with geography but more a trade-off of defences versus proximity to England.

That's part of "geography" in the sense that I was using it. In any case, the marshlands around Normandy are a minor obstacle compared to a major mountain chain.

The Pyrenees would have been a benefit to an Allied invasion of Spain since they would have had almost complete command of the sea. If they reached the Pyrenees a German counteroffensive would have been difficult, but the Allies would have been able to make further amphibious attacks at short range.

Originally posted by no1marauder
The Pyrenees would have been a benefit to an Allied invasion of Spain since they would have had almost complete command of the sea. If they reached the Pyrenees a German counteroffensive would have been difficult, but the Allies would have been able to make further amphibious attacks at short range.

Exactly.

Originally posted by sh76
You'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.

If you look at all of WWII history, a common thread is that invad ...[text shortened]... st fierce resistance rather than in southern Europe where the beaches were almost undefended.

Haven't you watched Patton? The invasion of Italy was in 1943.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Haven't you watched Patton? The invasion of Italy was in 1943.

Yes, I've seen it; but the movie doesn't show the difficulties the Allies had in ascending the Italian "boot." The Allies landed in Sicily in July of 1943. It wasn't until 1945 that they were able to reach the north end of Italy.

There's a reason the Italian theater gets so little play compared to D-Day. It was a side show.