From: Houston, TX
Some Frenchmen did as in De Gaulle but not Petain. The government gave up, so yes, no Honor.
Why should Spain have more?
Because of the Spanish Code of Honor.
Here is an example:
Let's be clear: The French actually fought the Germans. The Spanish stayed neutral. Sounds like the French win in the honor department.
It is in Franco's interest to keep things the way that they are/were. No war, rebuild the country, get revenues from the importation of goods with re-export to Germany plus the importation of goods from Germany with re-export.
Well that option's gone! He's in war and if he doesn't make a deal, the Allies will put the Republicans in charge after the war.
Plus the Spanish Maquis kept fighting and even invaded Spain to try and get the Allies to take out Franco. That did not work. The Spanish Republicans would be unlikely to work for the Nazis and according to you, the Nazis would take out the Nationalists.
Again, all the more reason for Franco to make a deal.
The Spanish Maqui were fighting the Nazi Germans, why would Franco want them back?
Why would France make a deal because of this? The Spanish Maqui invaded Spain in 1944 after most of France was liberated. So why would Franco make a deal with Nazi Germany then? The few guerillas in Spain could be and were relatively easily handled by the Nationalists, why did Spain need the German Army to help.
He wouldn't be handling them easily if his forces have been wiped off the map. So, if he wants to deal with them, he needs to make a deal.
He dealt with them by letting Germany deal with them. "Let you and him fight!" So no deal was fine with Franco.
Again, that puts the Republicans in charge post war.
Hannibal had it easy crossing the Alps against no enemy, didn't he? Germanyhad such a easy time sending troops, equipment, and supplies directly from Germany to Italy that they had to go through Switzerland - even though, at the time, Germany and Italy had a common border with road and railroad links.
The Alps! Do I have to explain that the Alps aren't hills, they're even beyond mere mountains. They would be rated Alpine. Supplies were shipped through the Swiss? A neutral? And the border between Italy and Germany was clearly crossed by the Allies in 1945 (link up at Brenner Pass).
How about this:
Mountain warfare refers to warfare in the mountains or similarly rough terrain. This type of warfare is also called Alpine warfare, after the Alps mountains. Mountain warfare is one of the most dangerous types of combat as it involves surviving not only combat with the enemy but also the extreme weather and dangerous terrain. Mountain ranges are of strategic importance since they often act as a natural border, and may also be the origin of a water source of (e.g. Golan Heights – water conflict). Attacking a prepared enemy position in mountain terrain requires a greater ratio of attacking soldiers to defending soldiers than would be needed on level ground. Mountains at any time of year are dangerous – lightning, strong gusts of wind, falling rocks, extreme cold, and crevasses are all additional threats to combatants. Movement, reinforcements, and medical evacuation up and down steep slopes and areas where even pack animals cannot reach involves an enormous exertion of energy.
It is generally accepted that the ratio required for the force launching an offensive to have a good chance of success is 3:1. In mountainous terrain, the required ratio is much more.
Then read this and maybe actually even learn something:
FM 3-97.6 (90-6)
HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
We're talking about hills not mountains and most definitely not alpine terrain.
< Message edited by Curtis Lemay -- 9/27/2020 3:53:57 PM >