Talk:Spain during World War II

message: The section on Franco and the Jews is rather POV, sufficiently so that I'm not going to jump in right now and try to clean it up. However, when someone next decides to work on it, here is some useful material. Much of this was previously in the article on Franco, but it really didn't belong there. Someone else cut it; I came here as a more appropriate place to restore it, but this is more of a mess than I want to tangle with, so here it is for someone to work with: - Jmabel | Talk 04:34, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If the article is wrong and you have evidence or sound references - or better references - then please "tangle with it" if only to add a caveat. Since I drafted some of this article, some good contrary material has surfaced, so please have a go. Folks at 137 07:50, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

text: OK, Here's the edit where I merged this in. So far, I haven't touched any other sections. - Jmabel | Talk 22:39, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Franco and the Jews

message: I have edited out the word "significant" because this is just wrong. There was no significance in Spanish involvment in the war on both sides. It was minor. Surely, it's heart warming to think that a nazi country did something significant for the allies, considering that NOW we all know who was good and who was evil back than. But c'mon, it is not significant at all. Ko Soi IX 15:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're right. Although it depends of course on what standard we're using—for a neutral country, I'd say that spearheading the Liberation of Paris is significant enough. Albrecht 16:29, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would have to disagree. One company, in whatever battle it participated, spearheaded, led or whatever, is far too small. Also, Spain's contribution to the Axis was much greater than to the Allies, but it is listed as "considerable" (in my opinion, it was negligible, but I don't want to argue about it), while the minor contribution to the Allies is marked as "significant". This may lead a reader unfamiliar with the situation to believe that Spain did more to help the Allies than the Axis. Thus I am removing the word "significant" again. With respect, Ko Soi IX 18:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, I basically agree that the introduction needs a due sense of proportion regarding which side Spain actually aided. But I have to emphasize that Spain was not a combatant—one company doesn't seem like much (and the 9th Armoured wasn't by any means the only Spanish formation—thousands of Republican exiles fought in the French army in 1940, Spanish Communist officers commanded Soviet troops in the East, and the Foreign Legion was packed with Spaniards), but how many companies did the other neutrals commit? What troops did Portugal, Ireland, and Sweden throw into the scales? Even the majority of Allied nations cannot claim the distinction of helping to roll back the Nazi hold over Europe, let alone liberating Paris—where were the Saudis; where were the Liberians; where were the Cubans, Guatemalans, Costa Ricans and Bolivians? We shouldn't trade one misconception for another. Albrecht 19:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sweden may have been neutral, but it is doubtful that Germany could sustain it's war machine without swedish iron ore. There were only four allied countries that contributed SIGNIFICANTLY to the war effort - USSR, USA, UK, China. All other allies, be they "real" (like Poland, France or Canada), or "phony" (like Liberia, Guatemala etc), contributed only a small fraction to the war effort. For instance, the Soviet Union is credited with taking out at least 75% of Germans and their European allies and up to a 1/4 of the Japanese. Certainly, compared to that, even the significance of the US war effort could be questioned, and they were the second largest allied contributor. With respect, Ko Soi IX 20:06, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, that's all certainly true, but I imagine someone reading this article will already know enough about the topic to realize that we're not comparing Spain to the U.S., the UK, or the Soviet Union! Albrecht 20:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, as long as we don't claim that Spain's input into the war (on whatever side) was significant, the article works in my opinion. With respect, Ko Soi IX 21:09, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

text: It's getting "off topic", but define "significant". Canada carried a substantial - perhaps critical - naval burden in the North Atlantic, supplied air crew and much of Montgomery's 21st Army Group. Brazil supplied a division that liberated Milan. New Zealand troops, ships and aircrew suffered casualties at a higher pro rata rate than any other western ally. India's manpower was also important in the Far East and Middle East. War effort includes commerce and supplies, in that respect, Spain's tungsten was very important (significant?). BTW, Ireland, although neutral, did not discourage its nationals from joining UK forces - this was a "significant" number for them. On the other hand, it's said that Britain bought the time, Russia spilled the blood and US provided the money to beat the axis.Folks at 137 14:51, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Off topic, yes, and a half-year too late. Beyond that, your line of argument does not address the question fairly. With Europe in ruins, Canada was the Allied world's fourth industrial and naval power; Brazil and India were territorial and demographic (and nascent economic) giants. Interesting pick, considering most of the world joined the Allied Powers. I think it's abundantly obvious that a neutral, Axis-aligned country, from which no help could be expected, ought to be compared to the lesser of the Allies rather than the greatest among their ranks. The ghosts of seven thousand Spanish Republicans haunt Mauthausen. How many Peruvians, Danes, and Liberians (or Canadians, Brazilians, and Indians, for that matter) shared their fate? (Having said that, it bears repeating that "significant" can and should go, as per WP:MOS.) Albrecht (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: First Paragraph

message: i can not belive what i am readingomg it is totaly omg :):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.164.86.229 (talk) 01:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I want greater detail. Suggestions for improving the article are needed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.57.15 (talk) 14:38, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  omg 

message: No, Franco could not have been motivated by what the Allies might think.  The Allies had a bad attitude towards the Jews before the war's end. Franco's motives remain unclear. Maybe he changed his mind when informed of the Nazi plans. But I'm not going to add that because that's my speculation. Editors should refrain from adding their uninformed speculations to articles.Provocateur (talk) I'll repeat again: before the Allies came across the Nazi death camps at the end of the war, their treatment of the Jews was often bad, even wretched.  There is simply no way Franco could have been motivated by what he thought the Allies may think a poor, bombed out country of 13 million people was doing for Jews on the far side of the continent> such ideas are historical nonsense and worse, unsupported personal speculations that have no place here.  All we know are his actions. Provocateur (talk) 11:16, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Franco's motivation regarding the Jews 

message: This is a touchy area. As the originator of the article, I wrote in British English, but in the interim, American English spellings have crept in and an effort was made in summer 2010 to spread this to existing text. Under MOS:RETAIN and MOS:TIES, I've restored British spelling standards and added a tag to this page. No offence (note spelling!) intended. Folks at 137 (talk) 16:30, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: British English

message: Shouldn't there be something on Spanish-Japanese relations somewhere? Also, the fact that Spain did recognize Axis puppet states like the First Slovak Republic, the Independent State of Croatia, Manchukuo and others.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.244.28.55 (talk) 17:13, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  If I may, maybe late, that is Japan who recognised Franco Spain in November 1937, according to some article that you can easily find on google (and signed by Florentino Rodao). Regards,  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.128.5.177 (talk) 20:17, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Germany, Germany, Germany

message: From Switzerland in the World Wars:
Swiss National Bank gold transactions from 1 Sep. 1939 to 30 Jun. 1945(in CHF millions)
             	Purchases	Sales 	Net
USA          	2242.9   	714.3 	1528.7
Great Britain	668.6    	0     	668.6
Canada       	65.3     	0     	65.3
Germany      	1231.1   	19.5  	1211.6
Italy        	150.1    	0     	150.1
Japan        	0        	5     	–5.0
Portugal     	85.1     	536.6 	–451.5
Spain        	0        	185.1 	–185.1
Romania      	9.8      	112.1 	–102.3
Hungary      	0        	16.3  	–16.3
Slovakia     	0        	11.3  	–11.3
Turkey       	0        	14.8  	–14.8
Argentina    	32.7     	0     	32.7
France       	193.2    	0     	193.2
Greece       	0.5      	0     	0.5
Sweden       	77.5     	3     	74.5
BIS          	61.5     	18.3  	43.2
Market       	71.6     	667.8 	–596.2
Confederation	269.3    	1087.9	–818.6
Federal Mint 	42.5     	45.8  	–3.3
You may want to work it into the Trade section.
--Error (talk) 20:46, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swiss gold 

message: This page has just been moved by a user from Spain and World War II to Spain during World War II. For the record, I oppose this move quite strongly. The current title has stood for quite a long time and was originally in line with a variety of other articles (cf. Ireland and World War I) as well as WP:AND. —Brigade Piron (talk) 07:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move 

message: The Blue Division was trained in Germany and served, with dubious distinction, in the Siege of Leningrad, and notably at the Battle of Krasny Bor, where General Infantes' 6,000 Spanish soldiers threw back some 30,000 Soviet troops.
:'Dubious' seems an odd word to use, not supported by anything in the article. Is this vandalism? Valetude (talk) 00:42, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  it's a fragment of a wartime quote--'dubious' is the term used by Hayes the US ambassador to Spain-- "Hayes called on Franco to ask him to withdraw the Blue Division from Russia, ... Spain is the "only free country in the world" with such a "dubious and dangerous distinction." Rjensen (talk) 03:28, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for supplying the reference. But he is clearly talking about wartime ethics by a non-belligerent nation, not military performance in the field. The text needs to be amended to indicate this. Valetude (talk) 07:53, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism? 

message: I don't understand the meaning of "Judeo"-Freemasonry.  I also doubt Spanish authorities or Franco considered Jews to be, as a whole, involved with Freemasonry. I think more citations are needed to show Fascist Spain had a policy about "Judeo"-Freemasonry, and preferably from sources that aren't just conspiracy theories.
Franco was indeed anti Masonic, probably because Masons were viewed as anti Catholic:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppression_of_Freemasonry#Francoist_Spain
Geo8rge (talk) 05:26, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Judeo"-Freemasonry should be clarified or removed.