The Role of Italian Armor in the Spanish Civil War

[Ironmachine]

1.- The question of AlhucemasThe operation of disembark of Alhucemas for to give a great blow against the army of Ab-del-Krim was possible thanks to the French offensive a great scale made by the French troops from French Mooroco,this offensive was led by the best French marshall,the Marshall P. Petain.The success of Ab-del-Krim Army in Annual made fear to France that a great muslin revolt could expand to French Morocco then France sent to Morocco to hers best general,the Marshall Petain.He organized a task force with colonial elite units and the Staffs of France and Spain agreed to make an offensive a great scale against the Ab-de-Krim Army.While the Spanish Army made a great disembark in the North on Alhucemas bay with crack units -this operation was prepared in detail by F. Franco- the French Army would attack by the East from French Morocco,the main was to take between two fires to the Ab del Krim Army.This operation was a great success and the Ab del Krim Army was defeated.
Alhucemas was a great military success of the Spanish Army but this success was possible thanks to the French offensive launched by French Morocco and led by Marshall Petain

Yes, yes, the Alhucemas operation was made feasible by French cooperation. But the Alhucemas operation was planned and mainly executed by the Spanish Army and Navy, making it a clear example (there are plenty more) that the Spanish Army doctrine was not "the doctrine of one army before of 1914". (And by the way, the operation was not "prepared in detail by F. Franco", who was by then a simple colonel.)
And if your are going to use the Annual Disaster as "proof" of the failure of one infantry army (the Spanish one), then you should learn why the French decided to involve themselves in the Rif War. It was not because "The success of Ab-del-Krim Army in Annual made fear to France that a great muslin revolt could expand to French Morocco" (as you say), but because the success of Ab-del-Krim in the French Morocco put the French control of the colony in danger: have you ever hear about the battle of Uarga in 1925, also known as the "French Annual"? A major defeat of the French forces in Morocco by the Riffean forces, that advanced to just 30 kilometers of Fez? So it seems the French army was also an "army of infantry" per your very criteria, not more advanced that the Spanish Army.

2.-Advantages to have a heavy industry.To be a great power in the world.To develop high technology.To change a country of shepherds of sheets and peasants in a great industrial power.In this way all are advantages....!

Yes, there is quite a number of advantages in developing a heavy industry. But you can have heavy industry and not a modern army, or a modern army withouth much of a heavy industry.

[Pedro Ruíz]

Ironmachine,much thanks for your very wise and interesting reply......!

1.-The Morocco War-I don´t want to open a debate here about Ab-el-Krim but he wanted to build in the North Africa one Islamic Republic seemed to califato that extended by all Morocco even more lands,the success militaries of Ab el Krim over Spain joined with the victory of Ab el Krim troops made that France joined to Spain and coordinated one great attack against the Ab el Krim Army for to get defeat it.Although France had heavy industries in which they could make tanks as the excellent Renault FT-17,the French Army between 1900-1940 was one army of infantry even in 1940.The French war doctrine in 1939 was the doctrine of the infantry.The Maginot Line was weapon thought for one infantry army or no ?,what do you think about this ?.
When I speak of "army of infantry" I want to say that the infantry is the capital weapon of the Army and all weapons (tanks,artillery even the aircraft) are to the service and subordinated to the infantry.Is certain the one modern army can not be without infantry,the infantry is essential weapon,but the tank and their derived (gun self-propelled,armored vehicles of wheels,hunting tank...) join the air power transformed the form to make the war,transformed the battefields.In the history of the war the armies that win the war,are those armies that have more technology.

2-The Spanish Army in Civil War 1936-39.With respect to the Spanish Army in the Civil War 1936-39,in both armies ever the tank was subordinated to the infantry,even also the aircraft.The was a weapon of support to the infantry.So the National Army as the Republican Army ever used the tank as weapon of support of the infantry.The Spanish Civil War has finished very fast if any of two armies had used the tank of knuckle-duster using against for to break the static defenses of the enemy preceded by one great attack to a great scale on the enemies airfields and to destroy on land the fighters and bombers,then the Spanish Civil War would have lasted few months perhaps one year,no more.The resources were on the table (tank and aircraft) but the military thought of the Spanish generals no.

3-A country without industry but with great army.Ironmachine,you say that one country without any type of industry can have a modern army and modern weapons,and you have right.I think in the Great Somalia of the Gen. Siad Barre in 1970s.Somalia had powerful weapons given of Soviet Union and perhaps China (fighters MiG-17,MiG-21;tanks T-54) but when Somalia attacked to Ethiopia in 1977 -Ethiopia had a communist regime led by Mengistu- the Soviet Union left to send weapons to Somalia and Somalia couldn´t have spare-parts for to repair aircraft or even tanks neither replace the weapons lost in the war or lost by wear.The problem of Somalia is the problem no to have engineers neither industries.

3-France as military power.Although France has a very important military industry with high technology,France never has been a great military powerful as has been England,Germany or USA.In the wars that France has had against England only one time France could win a war to England,the War of 100 Years only and Franco lasted 100 Years in to gain one war to England.The French people is a pacific people,France isn´t a nation of warriors.In the Great War 1914-18 France was near of the total defeat in two times,in the German offensive of summer 1914 and in 1916 in the battle of Verdum even had several and important soldiers revolts in the French troops during the war.Notwithstanding although the battle of Uarga was a defeat of the French Army,this defeat wasn´t so important as Annual,in this battle France lost 2.000 soldiers,much of them colonial troops,weren´t French.The spirit of fighting of France never has been high less in the time of Napoleon Bonaparte even with Napoleon,the French Army was defeated by the British Army also.

Best wishes

Pedro

[Ironmachine]

When I speak of "army of infantry" I want to say that the infantry is the capital weapon of the Army and all weapons (tanks,artillery even the aircraft) are to the service and subordinated to the infantry.Is certain the one modern army can not be without infantry,the infantry is essential weapon,but the tank and their derived (gun self-propelled,armored vehicles of wheels,hunting tank...) join the air power transformed the form to make the war,transformed the battefields.In the history of the war the armies that win the war,are those armies that have more technology.

If that is your definition of "army of infantry" most armies in 1936 (or 1940, for that) were "armies of infantry", so the Spanish Army was not less modern that most other armies.

With respect to the Spanish Army in the Civil War 1936-39,in both armies ever the tank was subordinated to the infantry,even also the aircraft.

The tank yes (and it is difficult to see how it could have been different, given the tanks available and their small numbers), the aircraft no. There were dedicated infantry support units, certainly, but heavy bombers pursued "strategic" objectives that were not subordinated to infantry goals in the field.

The Spanish Civil War has finished very fast if any of two armies had used the tank of knuckle-duster using against for to break the static defenses of the enemy preceded by one great attack to a great scale on the enemies airfields and to destroy on land the fighters and bombers,then the Spanish Civil War would have lasted few months perhaps one year,no more.The resources were on the table (tank and aircraft) but the military thought of the Spanish generals no.

Your knowledge about the resources of the armies of the SCW are sorely lacking, my friend. What you have posted here is just a nonsense.

Although France has a very important military industry with high technology,France never has been a great military powerful as has been England,Germany or USA.

Now, talking about nonsense...

The French people is a pacific people,France isn´t a nation of warriors

If you want to keep the nonsense coming, be my guest...

The spirit of fighting of France never has been high less in the time of Napoleon Bonaparte even with Napoleon,the French Army was defeated by the British Army also.

On second thought, no, there is a limit to the quantity of nonsense that I'm ready to read. Try reading a book or two...

[Pedro Ruíz]

Ironmachine,you have right in all.....! you win.