Re: The Bombing of Guernica
 

Aah, the difficult subject of legality!

Well the Germans were welcomed by the Nationalists, so in that sense they were at least invited to take part in an internal power struggle by one of the warring fractions.

As soon as a conflict starts the world community takes positions, it naturally comes down to an official position based on international pressure (read the view taken by the dominant powers in whatever international body is accepted by the majority of nations) and the unofficial position based on a variety of reasons ranging from cultural sympathy to national interests.

The difference between a legal government and an oppressive or objectionable regime that should be toppled is pretty arbitrary.

Again I am not taking any positions when it comes to the Spanish Civil War, but more modern conflicts have taught me to be extremely cynical and suspicious.

Re: The Bombing of Guernica
 

I've posted it once, perhaps you missed it? "...Read 'The Basque History of the World' by Mark Kurlansky, published by Jonathan Cape, London, for another account of the attack on Guernica..." Not that I think for a second you will accept any part of that account, as it does not fit you view the event.

Re: The Bombing of Guernica
 

Mr. Vasco:

I saw your response which was to read someone else's book. This is another way to avoid answering the questions which were raised. If someone asked me to prove that Oswald killed JFK and I told them to go read the Warren Commission Report and/or its attendant 26-volume investigation or to read Vincent Bugliosi's 1600-page book, I would be avoiding the question. Instead I would present in a summary all of the evidence against this Marxist. I never tell people to go read someone's book without giving them an idea of the point I want to portray and the evidence that it provides to bolster my supposition.

I don't have the book you mentioned at my disposal and I am not going to purchase it either. You were asked for evidence that contradicted my argument and you failed to provide it.

My original contention was that the producers of the 30-minute program either lied or never looked at the evidence surrounding the events of Guernica. The program claimed that there were no military targets in Guernica. This statement is a lie. The makers are repeating a lie whether they know it or not. They may very well believe it is true. But it is a sad state of scholarship. The same producers created another 30-minute program entitled The Men Who Invented Radar which gives credit to the British although the Germans already had radar which the narrator conveniently forgets to mention. This is the kind of history we get on the History Channel and the Military Channel, which do not produce their own shows but purchase them from whatever source available, in this case from Britain.

Re: The Bombing of Guernica
 

And I asked you to explain what business Germany had in attacking the forces of a legal and elected government in a country with which Germany was not at war. Oddly enough you haven't done so.

And quite frankly, anyone who adopts a Nazi persona is no position to complain about lies and propaganda, are they?

Re: The Bombing of Guernica
 

Mr. Beale:

I am glad you brought up the subject regarding the legality of Germany (and Italy) assisting Franco in overthrowing the Republican regime of Spain. One could also ask the same of Stalin sending material and personnell to Spain. I would like to know which international law which was in effect in 1937 made this illegal.

A knowledge of history shows that nations have intervened on one or either side in conflicts which were strictly within the boundaries of the nations concerned. Let us look at the conflicts prior to 1937, the practice of which would give Hitler and Mussolini the right to side with Franco and the Nationalist cause:

1. U.S. Marines landed in Nicaragua in 1910 and stayed until 1912 taking part in the fighting to suppress a revolution there.
2. The Marines were in Haiti 1915-34.
3. The U.S. intervened in the Dominican Republic 1916-24.
4. The U.S. again intervened in Nicaragua in 1927-34.
5. The Marines were in China from the Boxer Rebellion to 1941 enforcing American interests. (other nations also)
6. In April 1914 the Marines landed in Vera Cruz, Mexico to overthrow the Mexican government.
7. The U.S. intervenes for Panama's revolt against Colombia 1903 and got the Panama Canal.
8. The Western Allies intervened in Russia in 1918 which had signed a peace treaty with Germany and fought the Bolsheviks (with which I agree).
9. In 1919 Rumania invaded Hungary to overthrow the Bolshevik Bela Kun.
10. 1909-11 Britain and Russia invade Persia to protect their interests from rioters. (Both would invade Persia in August 1941 for Iranian oil.)

There have been many more operations, including clandestine, all over the world since the Spanish Civil War. Every nation has its own interests and will do what is necessary and in their power. Churchill ordered the attack on the French fleet, killing 1200 French sailors, at Oran and Britain was not at war with France. Churchill ordered the invasion of Persia in August 1941, killing 1000 Iranians in the process. Hitler had a more legitimate reason to aid Franco to avoid a Red state on the Atlantic. Recent information indicates that the communists controlled the Republicans in Spain just as the intelligence now indicates that Stalin was the controlling factor behind the invasion of North Korea into the south. We don't generally hear such revelations in the liberal dominated media which also put the disaster named Obama into power.

Re: The Bombing of Guernica
 

Two wrongs don't make a right and I did not seek to justify any of those other interventions. Stalin sent men and equipment to Spain at the request of the legal government - a poisoned gift - because, shamefully in my view, no one else would help them. I repeat, Germany and Italy had no legitimate business sending military forces or arms to Spain.

And that last sentence tells me everything I need to know about yuour world view and how seriously I should take it in future. If you truly imagine that the likes of News International and ClearChannel are "liberal-dominated" then good luck to you.

Re: The Bombing of Guernica
 

SS, I always find it hilarious when intelligent people use the power of free speech to criticise those who would criticise Nazi Germany. Irony such as that can only exist in a world without a ministry of ‘Popular Enlightenment and Propaganda’, which I am sure you will recognise from the list of new offices AH set out in his demands for power August 5 1932.

Re: The Bombing of Guernica
 

Nick, I know two US authors who are also retired career US military: David Glantz (yes, that one) and Henrik Lunde (ex-SF, Vietnam vet, Norwegian by birth, author of the recent book on the Norwegian campaign of 1940)). Care to know what do they think about Hussein Obama? Yes, the word used by Sylvester is apt. And how does the naval aviation author Barrett Tillman feel about Obama? Ditto. And you will find it pretty hard time to label these 3 people as stauch NS men. But all 3 are ardent supporters of the 2nd amendment, i.e. pro-gun. And that is apparently what drives a Briton, especially supporters of Tony Gungrabber Blair, nuts.

And as for the legality of German units being in Spain in the first place, well, their legality was just as legal as the presence of British troops in Iraq and Afghanistan today.

Re: The Bombing of Guernica
 

How many times can you miss the point in a single post? Nothing whatsoever that you have written offers a legal or moral justification of German intervention in the Spanish Civil War (the topic of this post).

I really don't care who in the USA agrees or disagrees with their incumbent President, that's their democratic right. Had you read managed to read my post to the end you might have understood that what I found so revealing of SS's worldview was his need to account for an unpalatable election result by conjuring up some intrinsically implausible "liberal domination" of a US media almost entirely owned by huge capitalist corporations.

You really have a desperately feeble grasp of British public opinion if you think Americans' attachment to guns drives anyone here nuts. Many are bemused by the importance Americans attach to the issue but that's all. And do you seriously imagine that Tony Blair's reputation in Britain, good or bad, rests on gun control laws? Amazing!

Nor should you imagine that involvement in the Iraq or Afghanistan wars has enjoyed universal support in Britain or — to get back on topic — that either offers retrospective justification of Nazi aggression in Spain.

Re: The Bombing of Guernica
 

I think this thread has reached its high point and will only get worse in terms of a constructive debate.

So to paraphrase Obama's campaign slogan, we're closing this thread because we can!